Yes, I am. Thank you.
The publisher of the Press supported Buchanan and gradually shifted over to the Republicans. It shouldn't be assumed that he was staunchly "Lincoln-supporting" at that point.
Ah, but yes he was. John W. Forney was an open supporter of Lincoln at the time. See: Link [My emphasis below]:
Meanwhile, Senator Douglas won the 1858 Senate election but lost the 1860 presidential election. Forney’s private allegiances switched before the votes were counted. He played an important role in keeping Democrats divided and helping elect Mr. Lincoln president. According to Robert S. Harper: “When, in December of 1860, The Press endorsed John Hickman, a former slavery-advocating Democrat turned Republican, to fill a vacancy in the United States Senate, it was open admission that Forney had joined the new party. When Lincoln took office, The Press made a public announcement of adherence to his administration by lauding the inaugural address and giving its editorial word ‘to strengthen Mr. Lincoln in all honorable endeavors to promote the general welfare.’ After Fort Sumter, The Press, called the secessionists ‘envenomed and implacable enemies’ and praised preparations for war made by the Union.”4
Sorry, but I have an advantage on you perhaps. Years ago, I purchased a copy of the old book quoted above, Lincoln and the Press" by Robert S. Harper. It cost me $50. Best book by far about Lincoln and the press that I have found. I recommend it to you. It has far more information than what you provided about the Press in your post, which looked roughly similar to what is in Wikipedia.
I also quoted the New York Times. I haven't made an in depth study of the Times during the March April time period, although I have a disk of all their war-time articles. The Times was effusive in its praise of Lincoln's first inaugural speech [Link], but fairly quickly became frustrated with Lincoln over his apparent lack of a policy to deal with the Confederacy and the tariff problem. My March 30 quote from the Times is fairly similar to what the Democrat papers were saying at this time. So, all the papers I quoted that pointed out the situation we were in (including the Times) biased in your view? Obviously all of them had their biases and slant.
The Day Book was one of the New York and Brooklyn papers banned from the mails by the Postmaster-General later in 1861 (part of Lincoln Administration's war on the opposition press, I think). Do you have any indication that the Day Book was misrepresenting New York City business failings in my quote from it above? I'd be very interested in hearing about it if you did.
The rapid fall of the tariff revenue surely would have had serious consequences on NYC import related businesses.
PeaRidge, you are the whiz about Civil War economics. Are there other sources about what was happening to New York businesses in this time period?
So did all the other Democrats that year.
That in itself didn't mean they firmly were on Lincoln's side.
Do you have any indication that the Day Book was misrepresenting New York City business failings in my quote from it above?
We know about the Panic of 1837, the Panic of 1857, and the Panic of 1873.
If there'd been a Panic of 1861 wouldn't the news have gotten out by now?